Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Hyde Housing Association Limited (202404957)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202404957

Hyde Housing Association Limited

16 May 2025


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration,’ for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould in the property.
    2. Associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident was the assured tenant of the property, a ground-floor flat owned by the landlord. He has since moved to a new property.
  2. The resident reported to the landlord on 22 September 2023 that there was mould in the bedroom and all wooden windows in the property were draughty and old. It attended on 29 September 2023 and completed a mould wash. It reported potential causes for repeated damp and mould and said the windows needed repairing or replacing.
  3. On 30 November 2023, the resident complained to the landlord. He said he raised concerns about mould in July 2023 and believed that it was doing nothing. He requested a thorough investigation into the mould and condensation.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 9 January 2024. It apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused by the time taken to complete repairs. It offered £250 compensation and arranged for a surveyor to inspect his property on 18 January 2024.
  5. The resident requested escalation of his complaint on 21 January 2024. He described the damp and mould as “out of control” and explained the financial impact this was having on him due to increased heating costs.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 3 May 2024. It acknowledged delays in completing works after its January 2024 inspection. It apologised and offered £500 compensation.
  7. The resident brought his complaint to this Service for investigation in early 2025 as despite works by the landlord in 2024, the damp and mould had returned to the property.

Assessment and findings

Damp and mould

  1. The landlord has provided evidence to us that shows problems with damp and mould in the property since December 2022. It completed a property inspection on 16 December 2022 and described “severe condensation” on the windows. It could not see any evidence of damage to the damp proof course but recommended a cavity inspection to check if the insulation was adequate, or even present.
  2. It is unclear whether the landlord ever completed the works raised from the surveyor inspection. In May 2023, it reported issues with a neighbour warning potential new tenants away because of the damp and mould issues in the property. It sent an internal email on 17 May 2023, attaching a pro forma and the requested repairs. There is no evidence that it completed any works before the resident’s tenancy started on 2 June 2023.
  3. The resident said he initially raised concerns about mould in July 2023 after his tenancy began on 2 June 2023. We have not seen evidence of this contact, but the landlord confirms this to be true in its stage 1 complaint response. This shows an ongoing issue with damp and mould before his tenancy began and into the early months of his residency.
  4. The landlord prioritises responsive repairs within 3 categories in its repairs policy and procedure. It will complete “anytime” repairs, those that are not emergencies, within 20 working days.
  5. When the resident reported further issues with damp and mould in the bedroom on 22 September 2023 the landlord responded promptly. It attended within policy timescales on 29 September 2023 to complete a mould wash and assess the windows. However, its operative commented that “As it stands, we will probably never wash this place for good. Despite clearing it regularly, the damp and mould will be coming back.”
  6. The landlord’s operative listed 5 potential causes for the damp and mould, as follows:
    1. Blocked gutters.
    2. Rotten, damaged windows, frames, and sills on the outside.
    3. Too small, not powerful enough, extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen.
    4. Possible damage to the damp course.
    5. Not enough drains for clearing rainwater from the outside walls.
  7. The landlord’s damp and mould procedure states that a surveyor should attend and inspect. If it finds that a minor deterioration of the property has caused damp or mould, it should arrange the necessary responsive repairs or stock investment works.
  8. Despite receiving the comments from its operative about the potential causes for damp and mould and comments that the windows needed repairing or replacing, the landlord did not raise any follow-on works to investigate any of this. This was not in line with its damp and mould procedure.
  9. The resident chased the landlord for an update on the window replacements on 1 November 2023. It assessed them again on 13 November 2023 and found that the front windows needed full replacement, with the rear windows needing repair or refurbishment works. It raised planned works for this.
  10. The landlord raised works to complete a mould wash on 27 November 2023 with an appointment date of 15 January 2024. However, it brought this forward to 21 December 2023. While this showed efforts to remove the mould, it had still failed to arrange any investigation of the root cause of the problem.
  11. In his complaint to the landlord on 30 November 2023, the resident said he believed it had ignored his reports and done nothing. He asked for a through investigation into the mould and condensation.
  12. The landlord cancelled the mould wash appointment following receipt of the resident’s complaint. It instead requested a surveyor assessment of the property and booked an appointment for 5 January 2024. This was a positive step, but it should have taken this action when its operative advised of the potential causes for damp and mould in late September 2023.
  13. On 11 December 2023, the landlord chased its contractor for a quote for new windows at the resident’s property. It received this on 21 December 2023 and passed works to its external planned works team for continuation. It told the resident this and said that it could take a few weeks to get all the necessary paperwork in order. This was a reasonable decision and it managed expectations well with its communication to him.
  14. In its stage 1 complaint response of 9 January 2024, the landlord said it was clear it should have completed the resident’s repairs much sooner and apologised for this. It arranged for its surveyor to inspect his home on 18 January 2024 and said it would then arrange any identified works directly with him. It said that it could only investigate failures from up to 6 months before the complaint, but it acknowledged that he had been contacting it since July 2023.
  15. As part of its stage 1 response, the landlord offered the resident compensation totalling £250, £200 of which related to damp and mould as follows:
    1. £50 for customer effort.
    2. £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
    3. £100 for the delays in service.
  16. The landlord’s offer was in line with its compensation policy for low impact distress and delays. Considering the history of the property and the fact the resident had been reporting issues with damp for 5 months prior to his complaint, it would have been more reasonable to increase its offer to the medium impact amount (minimum of £250 for each). Its offer of £50 for time and trouble was the maximum it could offer.
  17. Overall, the landlord took the most appropriate action to book a surveyor inspection for damp and mould as part of its response. However, it should have done this much earlier given the history of the property and not relied upon the resident complaining to do this.
  18. The resident emailed the landlord to escalate his complaint on 21 January 2024, following the surveyor inspection. He said he appreciated the offer of compensation, but it did not cover the amount of money, time, and stress the matter had caused him in the last 7 months. He reported that its surveyor told him the damp and mould was the worst he had seen it. We have not seen the surveyor’s report to verify this.
  19. The landlord raised works to complete a mould wash on 26 January 2024, but the resident declined this as his windows were due for replacement in the same week. It completed works to replace the windows in the property on 25 January 2024. While the landlord’s repairs policy states it will complete “anytime” repairs within 20 days, window replacements can be more complex, and landlords often give a 90-day completion time for works of this nature. It completed these works 73 days after raising them which was reasonable.
  20. The resident requested escalation of his complaint again on 5 April 2024. He reported continued mould growth throughout the bathroom, covering the entirety of the walls and ceiling. He said the landlord’s surveyor told him he needed a better extractor fan and towel rail in the bathroom, but it had not acted on this.
  21. The landlord completed works to check the radiators in the property on 19 April 2024. On 24 April 2024, it noted that it had raised no works after the surveyor’s visit on 18 January 2024, despite them requesting works to clear downpipes, overhaul extractor fans and complete a mould wash. It said the surveyor had also requested an electrical heating survey, but it could find no evidence of completing this. This was a serious failing by the landlord given the ongoing reports from the resident and the property history.
  22. Following its discovery that it had raised no works, the landlord raised works to clear the downpipes, overhaul bathroom and kitchen extractor fans and complete a mould wash on the same day, 24 April 2024. It raised downpipe works with its contractor but needed to contact them for a date. It booked extractor fan works for 9 May 2024 and the mould wash for 25 April 2024. It informed the resident of this by email. This was prompt action in the wake of its error.
  23. However, the landlord has provided no evidence to us that it arranged any survey for the electrical heating from the surveyor visit in January 2024, or with respect to the earlier mentioned damp proof course as a potential issue in September 2023. These were 2 significant inspections to complete and it failed to do so.
  24. There was no access when the landlord attended the resident’s property on 25 April 2024, but it rebooked the appointment with him and attended on 2 May 2024. It completed the mould wash and cleared the external downpipes on this date. This was positive action from the landlord, but it should not have taken the resident escalating his complaint for it to raise works.
  25. In its stage 2 complaint response of 3 May 2024, the landlord agreed that it did not address the damp and mould in the resident’s home when it should have done, and it did not communicate with him or offer any reassurance to him about how it would rectify this. It apologised for this. It provided the final date for works, 9 May 2024, to repair the extractor fans and made an increased offer of £500 compensation, £400 of which related to damp and mould, as follows:
    1. £100 for the resident’s effort.
    2. £200 for the delays completing his repairs.
    3. £100 for distress and inconvenience.
  26. While the landlord’s apology was fair, its offer of compensation was not sufficient to address the delays and distress faced by the resident and it still had not raised all works found by its surveyor, as necessary.
  27. The landlord completed works to the extractor fans on 9 May 2024. It closed the resident’s complaint on 9 June 2024. In January 2025, he reported that the issue had continued since this. It completed a further survey in February 2025 finding continued issues. It believed this could be due to an earlier leak. After this, the resident found a new privately rented property as he no longer wished to live in the landlord’s property with the ongoing damp and mould.
  28. The evidence in this complaint raises concerns about whether the property was in a suitable condition prior to the resident beginning his tenancy. The landlord did not act promptly on his reports and had clear knowledge of an ongoing issue with damp and mould since December 2022. The note from its operative on 29 September 2023, saying it was unsure whether it would ever clear the property of damp and mould is concerning. Furthermore, it took the resident chasing it for an update on works following this visit for it to take any kind of action.
  29. The landlord has provided a copy of its self-assessment against the spotlight report on damp and mould published by the Ombudsman in October 2021. It is unclear when it completed this, but it refers to many actions taken throughout 2023, some as early as January. In part 7, it says “We take the issue of damp and mould extremely seriously and investigate every report thoroughly.” This was simply not the case in this investigation.
  30. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord (compensation and apology) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, this Service considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles, which are to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  31. In this case, while the landlord did apologise for delays and inconvenience, it failed to raise all required works, and its offer of compensation was not sufficient for the issues faced by the resident. Considering this, we will make an order for a more suitable amount and recommendations relating to the property.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints policy. It aims to acknowledge new complaints within 5 working days and provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days of acknowledgement. It aims to provide a stage 2 response within 20 working days of receiving an escalation request. If it requires extra time at either stage, it will communicate with the customer and will provide a response no later than a further 10 working days.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord on 30 November 2023. It acknowledged this and made contact within the 5 working days. It then sent a formal acknowledgement email on 14 December 2023. It said that it needed more time to investigate on 29 December 2023. While this was within 10 working days of its formal acknowledgement email, it had previously tried to introduce itself on 1 December 2023. As such, it had already exceeded its response time period as set in its policy.
  3. In its stage 1 complaint response of 9 January 2024, the landlord offered compensation of £50 for the delay in acknowledging the resident’s complaint. While this offer was fair, there was no delay in acknowledging the complaint. The delay was in responding. This was further evidence of the landlord’s confused approach this case overall.
  4. The resident replied to the landlord’s stage 1 response on 21 January 2024. In this email, he expressed clear dissatisfaction with the remedies offered in its response. At this stage, it should have escalated the complaint to stage 2. He called it to chase a response on 9 February 2024 and sent a chasing email on 5 April 2024. It officially acknowledged his complaint on 24 April 2024, over 3 months since his first attempt to escalate.
  5. The landlord sent its stage 2 response to the resident on 3 May 2025. If it had followed its policy correctly, it should have sent this by 16 February 2025. It increased its compensation offer to £100 for complaint handling failures. This offer was in line with its compensation policy description of low impact delays.
  6. However, the landlord did not formally apologise to the resident for its complaint handling failures, nor did it explain these. As such, we will make an order for this.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident compensation totalling £1,000, comprising:
      1. £900 for the failures in its handling of damp and mould, which includes the £400 previously offered.
      2. £100 previously offered for its complaint handling failures.
    2. It must pay this amount directly to the resident and not use this to offset any remaining rent arrears, if applicable.
    3. Write an apology to the resident by letter or email for its complaint handling failures.
    4. Include in its apology a full explanation for the failures in its handling of damp and mould.

Recommendations

  1. This Service strongly recommends that the landlord survey the property for any remaining damp and mould issues. If there is a new tenant in the property, we recommend the landlord consider moving them if damp and mould issues are still present.